Mason Greenwood - Should He Be Sacked

[Oliver Hardy]

I can't find a thread on this...

Charges against Mason Greenwood have been dropped yet he remains suspended and there are calls for him to be sacked by Manchester United, because allowing him to play for the team will alienate woman according to the BBC. There are also calls he should never play for England ever again.

[J6542]

Big discussion in the Man United thread.

[g4ry13]

We live in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not sure what basis he should be sacked on considering that the judicial process didn't lead to any punitive action.

[Dingu]

g4ry13 said:

We live in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not sure what basis he should be sacked on considering that the judicial process didn't lead to any punitive action.

Famously people can only be sacked for criminal offences…

[Rufus Stone]

g4ry13 said:

We live in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not sure what basis he should be sacked on considering that the judicial process didn't lead to any punitive action.

We used to, I'm not so sure anymore.

[wisbech]

Of course United can cancel his contract - I would expect there's a clause in there about 'bringing the club into disrepute' or something.

In my view - they should. Why would you want your brand connected with those recordings?

[Voldemort]

Every away (and possibly home) game he plays will be to the chants of 'rapist, rapist' whenever he's on the ball. Not sure the rest of his team will put up with it.

[NuckyThompson]

That audio tell you why he won’t play for Man U again, Man U will say it brings club into disrepute and affects sponsorship.

Their lawyers are probably weighing up whether to end his contract now and concern that it will be challenged by greenwood in court and the subsequent image/sponsorship damage from that versus how much it’ll cost to pay greenwood off.

Some overseas team will likely take him on a free then

[Mrr T]

wisbech said:

Of course United can cancel his contract - I would expect there's a clause in there about 'bringing the club into disrepute' or something.

In my view - they should. Why would you want your brand connected with those recordings?

While no expert in employment law I doubt it would allow them to cancel his contract. It was a private argument which was made public without his consent. Since charges have been dropped I doubt that can cancel.

[bitchstewie]

The audio at the time was a very difficult listen.

You don't need a court case and a jury verdict to form a view of someone.

Sacking or mutual agreement who knows or cares how it's framed it but I'd be very surprised if Greenwood represents Manchester United or any major team any time in this country any time soon if ever.

[andymc]

have they not claimed it was "roleplay"?

[Rivenink]

Absolutely he should.

That audio is absolutely damning.

[Octoposse]

Rivenink said:

Absolutely he should.

That audio is absolutely damning.

Absolutely.

Strangely, if he’d been convicted, imprisoned, released, then I’d have supported his return to football, as I would the rehabilitation of any released prisoner back into paid employment.

[andyA700]

Rivenink said:

Absolutely he should.

That audio is absolutely damning.

I agree, what a vile POS he is.

[Black can man]

He's going to get abused every week , he's going to have to grow a thick skin if he plays on.


Silly boy.

[Black can man]

J6542 said:

Big discussion in the Man United thread.

There's a Man Utd thread ?

[Ian Geary]

g4ry13 said:

We live in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not sure what basis he should be sacked on considering that the judicial process didn't lead to any punitive action.

I was listening to the radio yesterday which was covering this, and they had a female victim of abuse on there.

She pointed out how easy it is for abusers to intimidate victims into not testifying - at which point the CPS would have to drop the case.

Obviously the CPS haven't explained why they feel the case should stop in this instance, but it made me realise there's often a lot more to it than "innocent until proven guilty" in controlling relationship/ abuse cases.

I've not looked at the link, but I suspect this is quite different to the case where the lady accusing a lad of rape had sent loads of messages undermining her case, which the CPS had forgotten to hand over to the defence.

[Jasandjules]

Mrr T said:

While no expert in employment law I doubt it would allow them to cancel his contract. It was a private argument which was made public without his consent. Since charges have been dropped I doubt that can cancel.

Bringing the company into disrepute tends to be a basis upon which an employee can be dismissed.....

[g4ry13]

Ian Geary said:

g4ry13 said:

We live in a country where you're innocent until proven guilty.

I'm not sure what basis he should be sacked on considering that the judicial process didn't lead to any punitive action.

I was listening to the radio yesterday which was covering this, and they had a female victim of abuse on there.

She pointed out how easy it is for abusers to intimidate victims into not testifying - at which point the CPS would have to drop the case.

Obviously the CPS haven't explained why they feel the case should stop in this instance, but it made me realise there's often a lot more to it than "innocent until proven guilty" in controlling relationship/ abuse cases.

I've not looked at the link, but I suspect this is quite different to the case where the lady accusing a lad of rape had sent loads of messages undermining her case, which the CPS had forgotten to hand over to the defence.

We often see people accused of rape / sexual assault having their faces plastered all over the media before it's even gone through the judicial process. Even if the person is found innocent and cleared they're left with the accusation against their name and some unpleasant results from a quick Google search.

A lot of these cases comes down to 'beyond reasonable doubt' and it's difficult when it ends up being a 'he said, she said' situation.

[g4ry13]

Jasandjules said:

Mrr T said:

While no expert in employment law I doubt it would allow them to cancel his contract. It was a private argument which was made public without his consent. Since charges have been dropped I doubt that can cancel.

Bringing the company into disrepute tends to be a basis upon which an employee can be dismissed.....

Tell that to Jack Grealish, Phil Foden and all the other players who brought bad publicity to their names and still end up playing for their clubs on a weekly basis...